Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »
Reply To Thread

Oh, Shoot (Connecticut)Follow

#377 Dec 22 2012 at 1:32 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Gbaji wrote:
A civilian with a concealed weapon looks just like anyone else in the crowd and thus has a better chance of being able to quickly stop a shooting before it reaches the magic number of fatalities to be considered a mass shooting.


In theory that is wonderful idea. Disgruntled Dan whips out an AK-47 in a mall and shoots Innocent Irene in the back several times. Businessman Bill just witnessed what happened and pulls out his .22 and shoots Disgruntled Dan in the head, saving the rest of the shoppers around Innocent Irene. Businessman Bill notices that Handyman Hank, Shopper Sally, and Gossiper Gladys all had their weapons out and would have killed Disgruntled Dan if Businessman Bill missed. The day is saved and gun rights is praised.

Now if we take a step away from Gbiaji-land and look at reality you will notice that Businessman Bill would have ended up another body in Disgruntled Dan's path.

Not going to touch your idea that schools should no longer be a gun free zone. That certainly tops the cake on some of the dumbest things I have seen you say.
#378 Dec 22 2012 at 3:19 AM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Jophiel wrote:
And, as the NRA holds a press conference saying we need an armed officer in every school in America, reports come in of a man driving down a Pennsylvania road, shooting people seemingly at random. Two men and a woman dead, shooter dead, three police injured.

This is why I don't keep a gun. Some people just need to be shot, the way they drive.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#379 Dec 22 2012 at 8:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Criminy wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
A civilian with a concealed weapon looks just like anyone else in the crowd and thus has a better chance of being able to quickly stop a shooting before it reaches the magic number of fatalities to be considered a mass shooting.


In theory that is wonderful idea. Disgruntled Dan whips out an AK-47 in a mall and shoots Innocent Irene in the back several times. Businessman Bill just witnessed what happened and pulls out his .22 and shoots Disgruntled Dan in the head, saving the rest of the shoppers around Innocent Irene. Businessman Bill notices that Handyman Hank, Shopper Sally, and Gossiper Gladys all had their weapons out and would have killed Disgruntled Dan if Businessman Bill missed. The day is saved and gun rights is praised.

Now if we take a step away from Gbiaji-land and look at reality you will notice that Businessman Bill would have ended up another body in Disgruntled Dan's path.

Not going to touch your idea that schools should no longer be a gun free zone. That certainly tops the cake on some of the dumbest things I have seen you say.

Yeah, I just can't figure out why some people think that arming everyone would be a good idea. Like I said before, it wouldn't matter what kind of training I had. I don't like guns and I know I'd do more harm than good if I had one. I might just graze the bad guy and accidentally shoot and kill two innocent people. No thanks.
#380 Dec 22 2012 at 9:25 AM Rating: Good
*****
13,251 posts
I imagine that at some point, school security will involve students being provided with a prison-esque uniform upon arrival to school. The clothing and belongings they brought with them will be locked up and stored until the end of the day, when they will be able to change back into street clothes.
#381 Dec 22 2012 at 1:40 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
On the bright side that would certainly cut down on the number of kids playing hookie between classes. Smiley: laugh
#382 Dec 22 2012 at 3:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
670 posts
Nadenu wrote:
Criminy wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
A civilian with a concealed weapon looks just like anyone else in the crowd and thus has a better chance of being able to quickly stop a shooting before it reaches the magic number of fatalities to be considered a mass shooting.


In theory that is wonderful idea. Disgruntled Dan whips out an AK-47 in a mall and shoots Innocent Irene in the back several times. Businessman Bill just witnessed what happened and pulls out his .22 and shoots Disgruntled Dan in the head, saving the rest of the shoppers around Innocent Irene. Businessman Bill notices that Handyman Hank, Shopper Sally, and Gossiper Gladys all had their weapons out and would have killed Disgruntled Dan if Businessman Bill missed. The day is saved and gun rights is praised.

Now if we take a step away from Gbiaji-land and look at reality you will notice that Businessman Bill would have ended up another body in Disgruntled Dan's path.

Not going to touch your idea that schools should no longer be a gun free zone. That certainly tops the cake on some of the dumbest things I have seen you say.

Yeah, I just can't figure out why some people think that arming everyone would be a good idea. Like I said before, it wouldn't matter what kind of training I had. I don't like guns and I know I'd do more harm than good if I had one. I might just graze the bad guy and accidentally shoot and kill two innocent people. No thanks.

This is the thing that worries me. I'm afraid a situation like this would spiral out of control. Once the second person pulls out a gun and shoots, how does anybody else figure out who is the attacker? They hear gunshots, look around, then start firing at the guy who was going to be the hero.
#383 Dec 22 2012 at 5:07 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
xantav wrote:

This is the thing that worries me. I'm afraid a situation like this would spiral out of control. Once the second person pulls out a gun and shoots, how does anybody else figure out who is the attacker? They hear gunshots, look around, then start firing at the guy who was going to be the hero.


Isn't it obvious? You look for the red nameplate. The green ones are friendly, duh.Smiley: tongue
#384 Dec 22 2012 at 6:02 PM Rating: Good
Gbaji wrote:
That's a ridiculous standard to demand though. What I can do is point to several cases which were prevented from becoming mass shootings because of the intervention of a armed civilian. Isn't that a more important aspect of this? You're demanding that I show cases where someone already killed 4 or more people in an area in which an armed civilian was responsible for stopping the killing, but discounting any case where an armed civilian stopped a shooting from reaching that magic 4 fatality mark in the first place.


And we can point to a real world mass shooting that wasn't stopped by the armed officer at Columbine. See the difference? You're working with hypotheticals, while we've got things like facts on this side.

Not that facts mean anything to Republicans, but still.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#385Kastigir, Posted: Dec 22 2012 at 6:15 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Let's take a look at the Columbine case. You're right that the presence of an armed guard didn't halt the attack, but let's examine why. According to records, the armed guard was at lunch when the attack began. After arriving at the scene, he at no point attempted to enter the building, instead opting to attempt to engage Harris and Kliebold from the parking lot, while they were still inside on their rampage. Witness accounts state that the security officer attempted to fire through the windows on 2 separate occasions where either Harris or Kliebold were spotted.
#386 Dec 22 2012 at 6:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Kastigir wrote:
You're right that the presence of an armed guard didn't halt the attack, but let's examine why.

Because just giving a guy a gun doesn't automatically turn him into an avenging archangel, shielding all of the innocents from the works of evil?

Especially when you're not even talking about giving trained officials weapons but rather just taking the NRA & Gbaji stance of assuming that the more guns you sprinkle into the population, the safer we all are.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#387 Dec 22 2012 at 6:27 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
But what's the lesson to be learned? Multiple guards on shifts? Better training to engage at distance or through openings?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#388 Dec 22 2012 at 6:53 PM Rating: Excellent
How about limiting the tools, & capacity of said tools, to make it harder to kill people with them? The issue with guns in particular is it makes it trivially easy to kill someone. Hell, the same day as Sandy Hook a guy in China attacked a school with a knife.

22 kids were attacked, all survived.

If we stop making it so easy to kill I guarantee you the body count is gonna go down. Sure, we may get the occasional bombing, knife, <insert weapon that isn't a gun> attack; but the loss of life will be lessened.

____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#389 Dec 22 2012 at 8:37 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
13,251 posts
Debalic wrote:
But what's the lesson to be learned? Multiple guards on shifts? Better training to engage at distance or through openings?
Small radius remote-detonated explosives strapped to all employees/students. A computer randomly picks one person to go attempt to give the assailant a hug. Their sacrifice will be remembered. Repeat ad infinitum until either no more employees/students are left, or the assailant is neutralized.

Edited, Dec 22nd 2012 9:38pm by Spoonless
#390 Dec 22 2012 at 9:25 PM Rating: Excellent
**
589 posts
Kastigir wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
That's a ridiculous standard to demand though. What I can do is point to several cases which were prevented from becoming mass shootings because of the intervention of a armed civilian. Isn't that a more important aspect of this? You're demanding that I show cases where someone already killed 4 or more people in an area in which an armed civilian was responsible for stopping the killing, but discounting any case where an armed civilian stopped a shooting from reaching that magic 4 fatality mark in the first place.


And we can point to a real world mass shooting that wasn't stopped by the armed officer at Columbine. See the difference? You're working with hypotheticals, while we've got things like facts on this side.

Not that facts mean anything to Republicans, but still.

Let's take a look at the Columbine case. You're right that the presence of an armed guard didn't halt the attack, but let's examine why. According to records, the armed guard was at lunch when the attack began. After arriving at the scene, he at no point attempted to enter the building, instead opting to attempt to engage Harris and Kliebold from the parking lot, while they were still inside on their rampage. Witness accounts state that the security officer attempted to fire through the windows on 2 separate occasions where either Harris or Kliebold were spotted.

Edited, Dec 22nd 2012 7:23pm by Kastigir


Didn't deter the attack at all, they still came knowing full well there was a armed guard.
#391 Dec 23 2012 at 1:13 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
RavennofTitan wrote:
Kastigir wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
That's a ridiculous standard to demand though. What I can do is point to several cases which were prevented from becoming mass shootings because of the intervention of a armed civilian. Isn't that a more important aspect of this? You're demanding that I show cases where someone already killed 4 or more people in an area in which an armed civilian was responsible for stopping the killing, but discounting any case where an armed civilian stopped a shooting from reaching that magic 4 fatality mark in the first place.


And we can point to a real world mass shooting that wasn't stopped by the armed officer at Columbine. See the difference? You're working with hypotheticals, while we've got things like facts on this side.

Not that facts mean anything to Republicans, but still.

Let's take a look at the Columbine case. You're right that the presence of an armed guard didn't halt the attack, but let's examine why. According to records, the armed guard was at lunch when the attack began. After arriving at the scene, he at no point attempted to enter the building, instead opting to attempt to engage Harris and Kliebold from the parking lot, while they were still inside on their rampage. Witness accounts state that the security officer attempted to fire through the windows on 2 separate occasions where either Harris or Kliebold were spotted.

Edited, Dec 22nd 2012 7:23pm by Kastigir


Didn't deter the attack at all, they still came knowing full well there was a armed guard.


Hell, in a way, I bet it's a bit of an encouragement. All the thrill of a Hollywood heist, sans the risk of going against a real threat.

It doesn't take a Danny Ocean to figure out how to deal with one or two school security guards, armed or not. Anyone who thinks that armed security guards are some sort of panacea are kidding themselves. We need more comprehensive solutions.
#392 Dec 23 2012 at 4:23 AM Rating: Decent
Spoonless wrote:
Debalic wrote:
But what's the lesson to be learned? Multiple guards on shifts? Better training to engage at distance or through openings?
Small radius remote-detonated explosives strapped to all employees/students. A computer randomly picks one person to go attempt to give the assailant a hug. Their sacrifice will be remembered. Repeat ad infinitum until either no more employees/students are left, or the assailant is neutralized.

Edited, Dec 22nd 2012 9:38pm by Spoonless


I think the time has come to ARM (Autonomous Robotic Martyrs) all of our schools. All the fun of a suicide bomber without the suicide.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 133 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (133)